D600 vs d7100

Me and some others just pointed out that the common blanket argument "DX does the same thing cheaper" is not entirely accurate. You pay different prices for different things, and depending on the perspective FX often can be cheaper (to provide a given result).

You seem to take this as some sort of personal insult.

Nobody claimed DX is inferior (except - indirectly - you). We just pointed out that in terms of bang-for-the-buck DX is not always cheaper.

Except nobody made that argument. Someone said FX lenses cost more, and then we got into some convoluted ridiculous argument about relative performance and relative lens price. Some guy comes in and asks "should I buy a D7100 or a D600" the first thing that comes to my mind is not "this guy needs ultimate performance better make sure he doesn't screw up and save 1000 bucks on that D7100 because that last stop of sensitivity and that 1 stop equivalent thinner DOF will make a lot of difference to his photography".